The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Enhancing Mixed-Matrix Membrane Performance with Metal–Organic Framework Additives
Open accessAbstract
Abstract Metal–organic frameworks (MOFs), as porous fillers possessing molecular sieving properties, have been combined with polymers to give mixed-matrix membranes (MMMs) with enhanced separation performance. This field of research has produced a large number of different membranes, and many MOF/polymer combinations have been tested and reported to show potential application to industrial gas separation. Although MOFs have been proposed as novel additives with high porosity and tunable pore size, which were supposed to outperform other porous fillers, due to restrictions in separation performance of the filler and challenges concerning the compatibility of polymer and MOF, only a small fraction of these works report both improved permeability and selectivity. In this review these challenges are set into the context of MOF synthesis and membrane fabrication by the choice of appropriate polymer/MOF combinations, utilization of the MOF functional sites, modification of the MOF surface chemistry or pore texture and size, and also targeted influence of the size and shape of the filler particles. The effect of the highlighted MOF additives on the gas separation performance is analyzed and discussed by comparison of the gas permeability and selectivity. This emphasizes strategies by which high performing MMMs can be achieved through accessing the full potential of the porous MOF fillers.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Ordered porous materials for emerging applications
Davis, M. E. (2002) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature00785 · Cited by 5,308
Cited by
Metal organic framework based mixed matrix membranes: an overview on filler/polymer interfaces
Lin, R., Villacorta Hernandez, B., Ge, L., & Zhu, Z. (2018) · Journal of Materials Chemistry A · doi:10.1039/c7ta07294e · Cited by 542
Advanced Porous Materials in Mixed Matrix Membranes
Cheng, Y., Ying, Y., Japip, S., Jiang, S., Chung, T., Zhang, S., & Zhao, D. (2018) · Advanced Materials · doi:10.1002/adma.201802401 · Cited by 448
Rahmanifar, M. S., Hesari, H., Noori, A., Masoomi, M. Y., Morsali, A., & Mousavi, M. F. (2018) · Electrochimica Acta · doi:10.1016/j.electacta.2018.04.130 · Cited by 389
Solution processable metal–organic frameworks for mixed matrix membranes using porous liquids
Knebel, A., Bavykina, A., Datta, S. J., Sundermann, L., Garzon-Tovar, L., Lebedev, Y., Durini, S., Ahmad, R., Kozlov, S. M., Shterk, G., et al. (2020) · Nature Materials · doi:10.1038/s41563-020-0764-y · Cited by 331
Wang, H., He, S., Qin, X., Li, C., & Li, T. (2018) · Journal of the American Chemical Society · doi:10.1021/jacs.8b10138 · Cited by 325
Metadata
- Authors
- Dechnik, J., Sumby, C. J., & Janiak, C.
- Venue
- Crystal Growth & Design
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2017-06-12
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 4467-4488
- ISSN
- 1528-7483 (ISSN-L)
- 1528-7505
- OpenAlex
- W2626741108
- Cited by
- 160
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 14.77
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.